styckx:The real question is why are gas prices continuing to go up when the U.S. oil production is continuing to rise and we are set to become completely self sufficient in oil production in a few years.

Because the oil market is global and even with our additional production -- which is still well below the 1970 peak -- the global supply has been roughly on a plateau since 2005.

wambu:Yes, let's do this. There are so many ways to cheat on this tax, many people will never pay any tax at all.

Pretty much this. I can disconnect the odometer/speedometer in about 3 minutes on my old pickup. More in the range of 15 seconds to disconnect the ones on the motorcycles. Since my state has no IM or safety inspections I could easily see a number of people saying "Yes, that is correct. I drove 8 miles last year. Problem?"

fireclown:slayer199: Pretty much this. You know the government will find a way to exploit that GPS data if available.

It was the reason for my breakup with Progressive Flo.[www.curtisinsuranceagency.net image 314x319]

Ya broke my heart, Flo.

No me. I would do nasty, nasty things to Flo. I'd start by gently kissing her mega red lips and groping her more than ample behind. Slowly, I would work my way towards her hair bump which is where I would insert my manhood thrusting repeatedly while she yelled "I'll lower your insurance bill!! !" until I finally climaxed over her head and onto her FLO name tag on her until then, clean white smock.

Get rid of the gas tax entirely, and add the fees into annual tag renewal, based on GVWR + mileage since the previous renewal. Everyone pays their fair share, regardless of the fuel source, based on how much damage they are causing to the roads.

The_Original_Roxtar:lets see... I drive ~22000 miles per year.at $0.015/mile, that's $330 under the new tax

under the old version, those miles are split around 19000 miles at 22 mpg and 3000 miles at 60mpg. 864 gallons + 50 gallons = 914 gallons. at $0.184/gallon, that's $168.18 under the old tax

you're punishing truckers more than anything else. increased shipping costs means everything is going to cost more, people will spend less, and the economy starts sucking even more. Looks like you didn't think your cunning plan all the way through.

What you have to realize is that the Fed is trying to make up for some illusionary shortfall in the fund. So there is really no solution that will result in anyone having more money in their pockets.

the best case scenario is farker99's idea (Tax based on (miles driven * weight of the car) / <some magical factor>) as it will at least balance out who is paying the lion's share of road repair based on their share of damage caused to the roads.

The_Original_Roxtar:lets see... I drive ~22000 miles per year.at $0.015/mile, that's $330 under the new tax

under the old version, those miles are split around 19000 miles at 22 mpg and 3000 miles at 60mpg. 864 gallons + 50 gallons = 914 gallons. at $0.184/gallon, that's $168.18 under the old tax

Your calculation missed a factor, there is the Fuel Tax, which is the .184 cents per gallon you previously identified, and then there is the State Tax, which was not accounted for. Since your profile indicates you are in Virginia your total tax is now .383 cents per gallon. This brings you up to $350. For you, the proposed change in the article is $20 less for you.

Worldwalker:jaytkay: Fark It: jaytkay: You wrongly claimed there is no mass transit outside the Loop.

I said there are no decent mass transit options outside of the city. I don't have the luxury of a set schedule that I can plan a bus route around, nor do I have the luxury of being able to live wherever I want. I don't have the privilege of being able to take into account mass transit when it comes to my employment. For me, and millions of other people, mass transit is not a feasible, reliable option. It has nothing to do with bus riders being beneath anyone, and I certainly don't "choose" not to use mass transit. I would gladly take mass transit if I could, but this smug notion that people who don't use mass transit are a bunch of snobs who think they're above common folk or are somehow too good for public transit is horseshiat.

You have no choice about where you live and work?

Are you in prison?

He has a job. That is not something you readily give up to move to a city (likely more expensive where you're living) where you don't have a job (good luck getting one in this economy).

Are you in your mommy's basement?

I have a job. I chose it. I have skills, so there were other jobs available, but I had to pick one.

I guess you were assigned one job and one home you are forced to accept that choice forever. Weird.

A dalek:The_Original_Roxtar: lets see... I drive ~22000 miles per year.at $0.015/mile, that's $330 under the new tax

Your calculation missed a factor, there is the Fuel Tax, which is the .184 cents per gallon you previously identified, and then there is the State Tax, which was not accounted for. Since your profile indicates you are in Virginia your total tax is now .383 cents per gallon. This brings you up to $350. For you, the proposed change in the article is $20 less for you.

Meh, after rereading the article and finishing reading the highpoints in the thread, I realized that the individual States would never give up their own tax income on the gasoline consumed. This leads me to the conclusion that we're pretty much farked.

jaytkay:Worldwalker: jaytkay: Fark It: jaytkay: You wrongly claimed there is no mass transit outside the Loop.

I said there are no decent mass transit options outside of the city. I don't have the luxury of a set schedule that I can plan a bus route around, nor do I have the luxury of being able to live wherever I want. I don't have the privilege of being able to take into account mass transit when it comes to my employment. For me, and millions of other people, mass transit is not a feasible, reliable option. It has nothing to do with bus riders being beneath anyone, and I certainly don't "choose" not to use mass transit. I would gladly take mass transit if I could, but this smug notion that people who don't use mass transit are a bunch of snobs who think they're above common folk or are somehow too good for public transit is horseshiat.

You have no choice about where you live and work?

Are you in prison?

He has a job. That is not something you readily give up to move to a city (likely more expensive where you're living) where you don't have a job (good luck getting one in this economy).

Are you in your mommy's basement?

I have a job. I chose it. I have skills, so there were other jobs available, but I had to pick one.

I guess you were assigned one job and one home you are forced to accept that choice forever. Weird.

Are you in North Korea?

You are fortunate to have multiple jobs available and the ability to quit one you don't like and immediately get one you like better. This is not the case for many people. Consider the spike in the unemployment rate over the past few years. We did not suddenly have a worldwide epidemic of slacking. Instead, people lost jobs -- often for reasons totally outside their control, like their employers going out of business -- and were unable to find new ones.There are more people who want jobs than there are job openings. Therefore, people who have jobs don't readily give them up. People who have to deal with the real world (where, for most people who are not independently wealthy, employment is essential) don't quit the job they already have in the hopes of finding a better one somewhere else.

By the way, I'm portable, employment-wise: I'm a website designer, and I've never even met some of my clients. I do most of my work from this chair. But I also know a lot of people who go where the work is, and take any job they can get, and are happy to get ANY job, rather than being in the segment of the population that is looking for work but can't find any at all. So no, I'm not in North Korea, but I continue to suspect you're in your mommy's basement. Reality isn't like "if you don't like your job, get a different one; if you don't like where you're living, move."

stovepipe:That's a real nice solar setup you got there. Be a shame if a hail storm came and farked it all up.

Considering my solar panels can stop a .22 or .38 bullet fired at close range - without penetrating the first layer of bullet-proof glass (they are impact glass on the front and back), I don't think a piddly little hail (or even large hail) will do shiat to my panels.

Fark It:An empty truck with trailer is at least 30,000 lbs, and they can weigh up to 80,000 lbs when they're loaded up with cargo. That wears down infrastructure a lot more than my car

The biggest reason I ride a motorcycle is the environmental benefits; almost complete lack of a footprint on the roads, can share a single parking space with 6 other similar vehicles (or park in a non-parking space), and the mileage...that infrastructure hardly even notices I'm there. Heck, quite literally, sometimes - redlights often don't detect me, for instance.

Fark It:I think this is bullshiat. The healthcare program I'm applying for only has a handful of clinical sites that are in the county, some are 90 minutes each way. Mass transit isn't an option for most people. Why go after motorists when you could go after the trucking and freight industries? An empty truck with trailer is at least 30,000 lbs, and they can weigh up to 80,000 lbs when they're loaded up with cargo. That wears down infrastructure a lot more than my car....

bdub77: Hurdles being like huge retail companies like Walmart with fleets of trucks on the road constantly and lots and lots of cash to pay for this bill to die quickly and quietly. Right?

Walmart (and FedEx and UPS etc) would love for individual motorists to foot the bill for our infrastructure, or to pay the same amount for their massive fleets of huge trucks that individual motorists do with their cars.

Just don't complain when the cost for items goes up. All additional taxes/costs put onto manufacturers or shippers will be passed onto the consumer.

Donnchadha:NutWrench: They aren't "replacing" shiat. This will be a new tax on top of the existing gasoline tax, no matter what they say.

But if that money gets turned around into improving and updating infrastructure (and also providing jobs in the meantime), I'm all for it.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!1!!

NutWrench is spot on. And I'm with with you, Donnchadha, but that money will still be funneled to other things. My Spidey-sense tells me that this is a way to raise moar monies and power, not to be fair to motorists. Shocking, I know. I suggest that although the taxes are high, they are plenty enough to maintain the roads and directly-related infrastructure--such as roads, roads, highways, signs, and roads. Add to that the state and any local revenue to federal taxes already in place. That's a lot of money to fix and maintain the roads. A major problem is the fine print that allocates a portion of gas taxes to other non-road making/maintaining projects and groups. It is a complex issue, with endless "studies," corruption, red tape, etc., but ultimately the problem is politicians of ALL stripes taking that money for other purposes other than my aforementioned list. Like what they've done with Social Security, for example.

1. create an incentive for emplyoees to move closer to work, and industry to move closer to workforce, thus creating2. a tighter living infrastructure which has higher maintenance costs, higher crime, and is a better target for every disaster movie ever made, from infections to insurection to invasion to acts of FSM, which in turn,3. creates an impetus for surviving younglings to "get outta this craphole and live somwhere I can BREATHE... screw the miles tax", which leads to a congress (small c) that says "Hey... let's switch the tax to gallons consumed, not miles driven, and that will allow folks to disperse and reduce crime, poverty, and stress on inner city resources!! We've save a butt load of tax dollars!!"

ferretman:Just don't complain when the cost for items goes up. All additional taxes/costs put onto manufacturers or shippers will be passed onto the consumer.

Currently, those companies are paying for road repairs via the fuel tax. If this change goes into effect, they will get off scott free, paying by the mile as if their trucks were cars. Do you think the reduced cost will be pass on to the consumer?

fireclown:Doesn't the gas tax already tax you per mile driven? And at the same time that it encourages efficient vehicles? If there is a shortfall, the rate can be increased. I don't like the idea of a GPS dealiewhatsit logging all my travels to the feds.

THIS!!!!

Raise the farking rate... What? Then more people will buy electric cars to avoid the gas tax? ISN'T THAT THE FARKING POINT!? We want more people driving electric cars, right?

Ya, I know, if everyone drives an electric car, then no one will pay the gas tax, and then how do you fund road infrastructure?!? I propose a system where every family sends their first born child at the age of 12 to work in the mandatory road work crews for 2 years as payment. Job creators exempt of course.

styckx:The real question is why are gas prices continuing to go up when the U.S. oil production is continuing to rise and we are set to become completely self sufficient in oil production in a few years.

JackieRabbit:As electric and hybrid cars steadily take over, the revenues generated by gas taxes will decline. So we have to start thinking about alternatives. I don't think taxing the number of miles driven is the best answer. It may be better for the federal government to levy a transportation payroll tax and use the money to improve public transportation. They could apportion some of the revenue to the states so that state gas taxes could also be eliminated. But they'd have to earmark the funds for infrastructure and public transportation use, lest the states divert the funds to other uses. A payroll tax would take the sting out for citizens, since a smaller sum would be paid each pay period instead of in a lump sum. It would also allow for those who do not drive automobiles to share in the nation's transportation system rather than just pay a train or bus fare that doesn't come near meeting maintenance and development costs.

Problem with that. Hybrids and electrics are no longer "en vogue," due to the reality hitting the people in the face. What reality? They aren't effective alternatives to the standard gas engine, and in some cases more expensive, more polluting (depending who provides the electricity to your car), and a bit more dangerous. Heck, despite the number of hybrid models doubling, hybrid sales have dropped from 2.8% in 2008 to 2.4% in 2012. Matter of fact, in 2012, only 35% of those who bought into the hybrids look at hybrids again for a new vehicle.

If the gas tax goes away and the mile tax hits, even more people will be discouraged to switch, while I'll be busy driving my pickup around.

How exactly would they verify the miles you've driven? Will this cause government to then create mileage attestation stations where we'd all need to stop in at once each year? Hire employees to work those stations and charge us $20 for the convenience? Take additional properties off the real property tax rolls to setup said stations?

What about farm tractors, lawn mowers, generators and other such petroleum powered equipment that captures engine hours vs. miles? It would seem that they are willing to give up collecting taxes for that fuel usage all together.

Seems like a lose/lose proposition and yet another ringing endorsement to just how truly stupid our elected officials are.

If I drive a tank, getting about 5 gallons to the mile and churning up the road as I go then I should have to pay more than a person in a sensible car. It is not right that both drivers should pay the same, one is causing much more road and environment damage which costs money to fix.

Increase the tax on gas then the people with the biggest or most inefficient cars or who drive the most miles get hit the most, as it should be, because they can afford it more, having bought a big car. If they drive a lot then no difference unless they want to drive a lot in a big or inefficient car. If they can`t afford it then it`s an incentive to have an efficient car...

BGates:OtherBrotherDarryl: How about a tax based on the number of miles driven but where there are incentives/penalties for driving more/less fuel efficient cars (ie, a gas tax).

Fuel efficient vehicles are the problem. They drive more miles per tax they pay.

People who drive fuel efficient vehicles should be the ones who pay the fees since they are not paying their fair share.

Those cars are also heavily subsidized by the federal governments with some estimates at 40% of actual costs. Tripling the gas tax on green vehicles at a minimum is the only way to ensure they pay their fair share.

It's only fair. All those 1 percenters who can afford Teslas and other electric cars don't have to pay gas taxes now. How else would we be able to pay for the highways once electric cars get cheap enough for the rabble to afford?

All right now baby, it's all right nowAll right now baby, it's all right nowLet me tell you nowI took her home to my place, watching every move on her faceShe said, "Look, what's your game, baby?Are you tryin' to tax me in shame?"I said, "Slow, don't go so fastDon't you think that fuel can last?"She said, "Fuel, lord alive, now you're gonna trick me to drive"All right now baby, it's all right nowAll right now baby, it's all right nowYeah, it's alright now